Niagara College Canada

Adjudication Process

Step 1: Distribution of Applications

Each member of the adjudication Committee will receive no more than five applications for review. The applications will be circulated electronically to the member. Each application will be reviewed by at least three committee members.

Step 2: Initial Review – Conflict of Interest

Upon receiving the assigned applications, members are asked to do a preliminary check of their assigned applications and immediately inform the Chairs of any conflicts of interest, so that these applications can be reassigned to another committee member. There may be a real, perceived or potential conflict of interest when the adjudication committee member:

• Is a relative or close friend, or have a personal relationship with any of the applicant(s);
• Has regular professional interactions with the applicant(s) during their duties;
• Is currently or has been a direct supervisor or instructor of the applicant(s);
• Is currently or has been a direct student of the applicant(s);
• Feels for any other reason that they are unable to provide an impartial review of the application.

Step 3: Detailed Review and Assessment

Committee members will use an evaluation template to score the submissions and provide feedback to the applicants.  It is important to provide detailed feedback that references specific elements of the application, noting strengths and weaknesses. These notes will serve as the basis for discussing applications during the adjudication meeting(s) and anonymized summaries of this feedback will be shared with applicants.

To complete your reviews:

1. Download the Evaluation Criteria form. You will need to complete one form per application that you review.
2. Complete the identification section at the top of the form, including your name and the unique identifier code for the application that you are reviewing.
3. For each section of the rubric, assign the application a score. Provide written feedback for each section justifying your score with specific reference to elements within the application.
4. Tally up your scores and record an overall score on the form.
5. Save each file with the following naming convention “Proposal ID Code_Your Surname_Year”.
6. Once you have completed all of your reviews, email the completed forms to the Co-Chairs ([email protected] and [email protected]) by a specified date.

The Chairs will compile all scores to share at the initial Adjudication Committee meeting. If unexpected circumstances impact your ability to complete the reviews according to the above stated timeline, please contact the Chair(s) as soon as possible so that your applications can be reassigned.

Adjudication Principles

The work of this committee is based on the ideals of cooperation and mutual respect for diverse viewpoints across all areas of the college. Our work is guided by the following principles:

Collegiality and shared participation

Research shows that diversity improves critical thinking, deliberations, and problem solving, which are valuable attributes for fair adjudication processes and outcomes. To benefit from each committee member’s unique perspective and experience, we commit to a collegial process grounded in mutual trust and respect, open discussion, constructive dissent and support for decisions after they have been made. Each member commits to engaging in a thoughtful and thorough review of all assigned applications.

Evidence-informed decision making

Adjudications should be based on the contents of the award application and rationale for scoring should be justified with specific reference to application elements. To support a fair process, members agree to limit their considerations to the content of the applications and to not draw on or share insights or experiences with the applicant(s) that are not referenced within the application.

Awareness of the impacts of structural inequities and bias on decision-making

Biases present systemic barriers to members of equity-deserving groups. The potential for bias in review processes will be openly and clearly acknowledged by this adjudication panel. As members, we commit to enhancing awareness of our own biases, recognizing their effects on our decisions, and developing a clear and transparent process to reduce the impact of these biases on decision-making. We also commit to welcoming feedback from our colleagues that may present alternative perspectives or highlight potential biases in application reviews or on the adjudication process itself.

Confidentiality

Members agree to respect confidentiality of the adjudication process and may not disclose any application details or adjudication proceedings both during the period that the Committee is active and thereafter. Members should maintain the confidentiality of the deliberations of the Committee and all information relating to these deliberations. They should also maintain the confidentiality of all documents relating to the adjudication process and the work of the Committee and ensure that this information is securely stored.

Management of conflicting interests

Members agree to promptly declare interests when carrying out review activities, so that any conflicts can be identified and managed.

Transparency

Publish the criteria for assessing applications, as well as details of the review process, defining how the assessment process will operate and be managed.